Linux advocates have for so long advocated browser-accessed software as a service as a way to break out of Microsoft's proprietary desktop. Now that this world has arrived, there's less incentive to work on native Linux apps.

If he supports Linux-only apps there is no catch, at least not the catch you mention.

So you think adding more crap to the pile doesn't make it stink any worse? We can agree to disagree on that point.

So it's just like Windows, only with much less crap and mediocre software. One look at, say, Tucows confirms this without a doubt. There are great Linux software, there are great Windows software and great OSX software etc. Perhaps Linux has less, perhaps not. The only "great" software Windows has that I need are games. There's not one other piece of software Windows has that I need. That's just me though, it will be different for everyone and depend greatly what you do with your computer.

Comparing numbers directly you can say Linux has much less crap and mediocre software. Of course, it has much less software available period. But, if you scale the number of great software vs. crap limited to the range of what's available, the resulting Linux percentage I'm sure is right in line with what you see in Windows.

Your closing point is really the only point that needs to be made. Every user has a different set of needs and his/her choices should be made with those needs taken into consideration. I've said repeatedly that users should use what works best for them. I myself am a daily user of both Windows and Linux for that very reason.

I understand this is a very pro-Linux/anti-Microsoft forum. There's actually more Linux penis stroking here than on the Linux (user and dev) mailing lists I frequent. Regardless, people should make an effort to keep things in perspective.